Their leader cant stop fighting, he would be disgraced. They can’t show they are being destroyed by a lesser power so they engage a bigger enemy, make it so their embarassment was all a calculated NATO escalation.
They also get to look strong by pushing NATO, because NATO dont want a war and trump is weak so its a good time to push to trt expose NATO as lesser.
First is testing the response times, locations, scale, etc… If you intentionally violate air space, you can measure how long it takes for your future opponent to scramble their own response. You can see what kind of equipment they send to respond. You can see where the response comes from. You can see how many combatants they send to respond. That is all valuable info if you’re planning potential attacks in the future.
Second is creating a “boy who cried wolf” situation. Repeatedly violate their airspace, and they’ll begin to see the violations as routine. They’ll stop treating them as genuine threats, and will simply start treating them as just another annoyance. None of the violations ever result in an attack, so why would this one be any different? Then when the actual attack comes, your opponent is caught with their pants down because they weren’t fully responsive.
Third is money. In the grand scheme of things, flying a single drone around is a drop in the bucket. In contrast, a sudden scrambled response costs a lot. It’s a lot of sudden manpower and logistics to coordinate. Especially when the violation turns out to be a nothing-burger. If you want to begin straining your opponent before a war even begins, make them start counting pennies before you attack.
Fourth, it could be posturing. Look at how weak our enemy is! They can’t even patrol their own border. They’re afraid of us and let us into their airspace. Etc…
Fifth could be intimidation. Remind them that they’re within poking distance. Especially since they’de supporting Ukraine. Want to discourage that support? Encourage them to circle the wagons and bring their support home instead.
Sixth: shaping public opinion and undermining trust in institutions. „Why are so many trains and planes delayed? Aren’t they doing anything? Is the government really acting in our best interest?“
Thus enabling a platform for right-wing narratives to further weaken politic will against Russia.
Here in the UK that tactic is futile, our trains are delayed and cancelled at such a high rate I’d suspect Russian interference if they suddenly started working properly.
The problem with most of these is that Russia isn’t going to invade EU territory. Everything you said wouldn’t make up the sheer quality difference between their military and that of EU countries.
You are presenting something as truth that is far from clear. Russia very much has the ambition to conquer the Baltics. Are they stupid and going for total war? Of course not. They play on many fronts, a main one is propaganda and help their people in the EU (Le Oen, AfD, FPÖ etc) get into power, let the US regime functionally betray NATO (no need to actually leave it) and then do some semi hybrid raoid attack to create facts.
I’m basing this all on reports from the Institute for the Study of War (which is a Washington based organization, mind you). I’m just a layman who likes reading the ISW. So take it with a grain of salt.
The ISW has repeatedly said (bullet points ISW, comments are mine):
Russia uses hybrid warfare to accomplish objectives it might not otherwise be able to reach in a traditional conflict. Psyops reinforce real battlefield conditions by, for example, discouraging the west from providing meaningful support such as equipment
A good example of this is over a year ago when there were discussions in The Netherlands against providing Ukraine with F-16’s which were an “offensive weapon”. (Is there such a thing as a ‘defensive’ weapon I ask you?)
Russia is clearly not interested in coming to the negotiation table and they believe they are still able to make meaningful gains on the battlefield.
The Kremlin might be smoking too much of it’s own disinformation and is acting on false or misleading information.
They will keep the pressure on since a loss on a battlefield is a sure way for Putin and his ‘strongman’ image to go to shit. Russia needs a victory to sell itself. Nearly everything they do including the disinformation in their papers, the bullshit on TV and the diplomatic signaling to other nations is in service of that. The state controls everything because authoritarianism is a fact and a way of life over there.
I think Putin and his cronies feel existentially threatened because they can’t sell a victory to the people. They’re forced to sell god knows how many of KIA/MIA/WIA/POW. The ISW also reported that an immediate return of Russian combat veterans into society might lead to some nasty stuff and that would have to be dealt with either by Russia or in negotiations with Russia.
Back to what ISW said:
Russia is in ‘phase zero’ and the ‘information setting stage’ of a conflict with NATO.
Russia is banking on NATO somehow ‘giving up’ with the war when the going gets tough.
These drone attacks (or any border/airspace incidents) are part of probing how the west responds and gauging capabilities of the west.
I think there might also a little bit of some soldier somewhere “accidentally” misprogramming a drone’s path to fuck with the west a little? It doensn’t all have to come from higher up. Drone attacks and border incidents can just as easily be one angry vatnik and now you have a diplomatic incident that Putin himself probably believes as “European warmongering”. Who knows?
If Russia can’t win this war? It’s all the fault of the Nazi imperialist west, since the “expansion of NATO” threatens the “traditional” heteronormative values of Russian society. So we’re the cause of this war, even though Russia annexed Crimea, shot down MH17, genocides the Ukrainians, indoctrinates Ukrainian children and kills people in the street and prisoners of war in cold blood.
‘Just war’ theory says something about when entering and continuing a war is ‘just’ or not. I have no idea where nuclear weapons fit into this but I don’t want to find out.
the amount of “accidents” in factories producing military goods in Europe is currently skyrocketing, so i wouldn’t say this is random
small-scale attacks to delay or deny support for ukraine are far less likely to trigger NATO article 5 than e.g. launching ballistic missiles at factories in NATO territory.
Russia hitting NATO countries too hard would come at a very steep price for Russia - i don’t think they can afford NATO or even a group of European countries entering the war on the side of Ukraine. Russian air defense has been decimated since the start of this year - i don’t think they would be able to protect their assets, even if NATO countries would struggle with intercepting Geran-4 or Banderol.
Add costs to the continued support of Ukraine’s defense, try to scare people into telling their politicians to stop or reduce that support. Standard terrorist playbook stuff.
My own guess is that making citizens of European countries feel unsafe helps rightwing politicians. Those politicians are both less likely to support Ukraine (especially as the right becomes the far right) and more likely to be terrible for their countries in other ways, so it’d fit with Russia’s overall propaganda strategy.
What I don’t understand is, why would Russia randomly do these small-scale actions.
Their leader cant stop fighting, he would be disgraced. They can’t show they are being destroyed by a lesser power so they engage a bigger enemy, make it so their embarassment was all a calculated NATO escalation.
They also get to look strong by pushing NATO, because NATO dont want a war and trump is weak so its a good time to push to trt expose NATO as lesser.
A few reasons.
First is testing the response times, locations, scale, etc… If you intentionally violate air space, you can measure how long it takes for your future opponent to scramble their own response. You can see what kind of equipment they send to respond. You can see where the response comes from. You can see how many combatants they send to respond. That is all valuable info if you’re planning potential attacks in the future.
Second is creating a “boy who cried wolf” situation. Repeatedly violate their airspace, and they’ll begin to see the violations as routine. They’ll stop treating them as genuine threats, and will simply start treating them as just another annoyance. None of the violations ever result in an attack, so why would this one be any different? Then when the actual attack comes, your opponent is caught with their pants down because they weren’t fully responsive.
Third is money. In the grand scheme of things, flying a single drone around is a drop in the bucket. In contrast, a sudden scrambled response costs a lot. It’s a lot of sudden manpower and logistics to coordinate. Especially when the violation turns out to be a nothing-burger. If you want to begin straining your opponent before a war even begins, make them start counting pennies before you attack.
Fourth, it could be posturing. Look at how weak our enemy is! They can’t even patrol their own border. They’re afraid of us and let us into their airspace. Etc…
Fifth could be intimidation. Remind them that they’re within poking distance. Especially since they’de supporting Ukraine. Want to discourage that support? Encourage them to circle the wagons and bring their support home instead.
Sixth: shaping public opinion and undermining trust in institutions. „Why are so many trains and planes delayed? Aren’t they doing anything? Is the government really acting in our best interest?“ Thus enabling a platform for right-wing narratives to further weaken politic will against Russia.
Here in the UK that tactic is futile, our trains are delayed and cancelled at such a high rate I’d suspect Russian interference if they suddenly started working properly.
Good to know that it’s like that elsewhere. The other day I was on a trip: planned for 3.5h, arrived with 6h delay and was in the hotel 1:00am. Yay.
Now if this isn’t a source of pan-European solidarity I don’t know what is!
I think this is actually close to the top among the reasons, even if the others are valid too.
The problem with most of these is that Russia isn’t going to invade EU territory. Everything you said wouldn’t make up the sheer quality difference between their military and that of EU countries.
You are presenting something as truth that is far from clear. Russia very much has the ambition to conquer the Baltics. Are they stupid and going for total war? Of course not. They play on many fronts, a main one is propaganda and help their people in the EU (Le Oen, AfD, FPÖ etc) get into power, let the US regime functionally betray NATO (no need to actually leave it) and then do some semi hybrid raoid attack to create facts.
Damn good post Carl
There’s a reason he’s the number one Crawler
I’m basing this all on reports from the Institute for the Study of War (which is a Washington based organization, mind you). I’m just a layman who likes reading the ISW. So take it with a grain of salt.
The ISW has repeatedly said (bullet points ISW, comments are mine):
A good example of this is over a year ago when there were discussions in The Netherlands against providing Ukraine with F-16’s which were an “offensive weapon”. (Is there such a thing as a ‘defensive’ weapon I ask you?)
They will keep the pressure on since a loss on a battlefield is a sure way for Putin and his ‘strongman’ image to go to shit. Russia needs a victory to sell itself. Nearly everything they do including the disinformation in their papers, the bullshit on TV and the diplomatic signaling to other nations is in service of that. The state controls everything because authoritarianism is a fact and a way of life over there.
I think Putin and his cronies feel existentially threatened because they can’t sell a victory to the people. They’re forced to sell god knows how many of KIA/MIA/WIA/POW. The ISW also reported that an immediate return of Russian combat veterans into society might lead to some nasty stuff and that would have to be dealt with either by Russia or in negotiations with Russia.
Back to what ISW said:
I think there might also a little bit of some soldier somewhere “accidentally” misprogramming a drone’s path to fuck with the west a little? It doensn’t all have to come from higher up. Drone attacks and border incidents can just as easily be one angry vatnik and now you have a diplomatic incident that Putin himself probably believes as “European warmongering”. Who knows?
If Russia can’t win this war? It’s all the fault of the Nazi imperialist west, since the “expansion of NATO” threatens the “traditional” heteronormative values of Russian society. So we’re the cause of this war, even though Russia annexed Crimea, shot down MH17, genocides the Ukrainians, indoctrinates Ukrainian children and kills people in the street and prisoners of war in cold blood.
‘Just war’ theory says something about when entering and continuing a war is ‘just’ or not. I have no idea where nuclear weapons fit into this but I don’t want to find out.
100% provocation.
Testing the water.
Russia hitting NATO countries too hard would come at a very steep price for Russia - i don’t think they can afford NATO or even a group of European countries entering the war on the side of Ukraine. Russian air defense has been decimated since the start of this year - i don’t think they would be able to protect their assets, even if NATO countries would struggle with intercepting Geran-4 or Banderol.
War is not rational. Do not expect it to make sense.
They want to slowly push the red line of what they can get away with.
Add costs to the continued support of Ukraine’s defense, try to scare people into telling their politicians to stop or reduce that support. Standard terrorist playbook stuff.
My own guess is that making citizens of European countries feel unsafe helps rightwing politicians. Those politicians are both less likely to support Ukraine (especially as the right becomes the far right) and more likely to be terrible for their countries in other ways, so it’d fit with Russia’s overall propaganda strategy.
Same reason they sabotaged the nord stream pipelines.
That was the CIA.
IIRC, investigators determined that Ukrainian agents carried that out.